Tag Archives: snob

There are sources from all over that seem to want to bad-mouth and discredit the importance of eating sustainable, organic food.

It seems perplexing as to why anyone would want to do this, but some of the biggest motivators against the sustainable food movement are big, powerful corporations selling toxic foods that don’t want this segment of the market edging out their profits.

Those who truly care about their health are snobs?

It’s irksome and tiring hearing conventional authorities of health, agriculture, and medicine continue to behave in such a juvenile manner by using these terms to describe supporters of the real food movement.

In a recent TIME Magazine article, Dr. Oz elaborates as to why you needn’t spend ridiculous sums of money on organic, when it’s really no better than conventional.

It’s been said over and over again, that if you buy organic food this somehow makes you an “elitist” or a “snob”. Dr. Oz is the latest in a long-line of “authority” figures to make this claim.

Oh really? I’ll tell you just how non elitist my family is, and we do eat organic, sustainable foods: My husband and I both come from modest, middle-class backgrounds. We attended a state college here in Boise, ID (Boise State University) and worked our way through school. We both worked part-time 20-hour-a-week jobs, and lived off of about $1200 a month for rent, groceries, and other bills.

Like many others, when we graduated we had credit card and student loan debts. Although my husband was offered a good job in Spokane, WA in 2000 including a sign on bonus and moving expenses, we spent most of it paying student loans, bought a car and some furniture since we had practically none. I worked part-time through this span of my professional career as a technical writer. Shortly after moving, I became pregnant and the work I was doing continued to lessen. After our son was born, I stopped working. We moved back to Boise to be near family since he was born 9 weeks premature because my appendix ruptured and we needed support.

For the first 5 years after my son was born, I didn’t work. In 2006 I worked part-time for the YMCA, then migrated into my current self-employed status of writing and health coaching. In 2009 my husband was laid off from his job. We used our retirement money to start a solar business. Like many other small businesses, we struggled to make ends meet. In 2011, our business partners decided to leave the state without any notice or arrangements, and left us with tens of thousands of dollars in debts, and all the tasks associated with closing down the business. We will be paying those debts off for years.

My husband is now employed full-time again, and we are stable, but money is always tight and we do the best we can. I continue to work full-time hours with part-time pay. But I love my job because I spend all my time educating people about the ways to eat and live well, and to avoid bad advice from “medical professionals” like Dr. Oz.

Each month we prioritize what it is we need to spend our money on, and it amounts to this (and in this order):

healthy food

rent

monthly bills and gas

a little extra money for other items including occasional eating out or clothing, household items (last month it was a new tire for $200), and other miscellaneous that budget and save for

Our budget for items like clothes, vacations, entertainment, and hobbies is few and far between. And it’s the same for many people: ordinary folks who have families and who are on one income, singles with one income, people who have had their income reduced or their jobs eliminated and who are unemployed or work part-time while they look for something else, college students, and those who are retired and on a fixed income; these are the people who make up the bulk of our population.

There are people in these demographic populations who want to be healthier, want to avoid toxic chemicals, and desire to consume more nutrients in their food. Does that make them snobbish? Apparently in some figurative universe that is so. However, in the real world and for real people: To eat healthy means to do without extras, to save wherever you can, and to find the best deals available. So yeah, last time I checked, people like my husband and all the others I described are not the highfalutin, elitist, types.

Organic and sustainable too expensive?

Another myth that should be dispelled right here and right now is that it’s too expensive to eat healtier. I’m here to tell you that finding good deals on locally-raised, sustainable food is not only possible, it’s done by many and our family does it regularly. If you know what to look for, you can find some great deals. The mainstream health and food industries are not only fond of saying it’s snobbish to eat healthy food, but that since you can’t afford it, you might as well buy their toxic, chemical-filled foods (which by the way, aren’t as cheap as they’d like you think).

If you continue to insist that the only way to buy organic food is to shop at Whole Foods, you will indeed be disappointed. Chances are things will never change for you. Products sold at stores such as Whole Foods are by and large overpriced and you are not getting your money’s worth in many cases because you don’t even know for certain if the food is what it says it is on the label. Read 8 reasons I won’t shop at Whole Foods when it opens in Boise, Idaho (they are now open and I haven’t shopped there once). If you say you can’t afford to eat better, maybe it’s time to change priorities and make it happen.

By supporting local, sustainable farmers in your own community who are transparent in their farming methods, you can likely find a way to afford the food you want – especially if you are willing to do without all the luxuries and extras you think you need.

To say that buying organic food is no better for your health than conventional or is not worth the money spent is ignoring long-term health effects of eating healthy to decrease the risk of developing degenerative disease and illness. Eating healthy now will save you medical costs later. It’s that simple.

It’s quite amazing how expensive processed and mainstream foods are. And, you won’t get anything for your money besides toxins, chemicals, and health problems. You are also donating tax dollars for government subsidies which go to big corporations for these “food-like” products.

“Grassfed is not much different than feedlot”

Dr. Oz said, “Nutritionally, there is not much difference between, say, grass-fed beef and the feedlot variety. The calories, sodium and protein content are all very close. Any lean meats are generally fine as long as the serving size is correct–and that means 4 to 6 oz., roughly the size of your palm. A modest serving like that can be difficult in a country with as deep a meat tradition as ours, where steak houses serve up 24-oz. portions and the term meat and potatoes is a synonym for good eating. But good eating isn’t always healthy eating, and we’re not even built to handle so much animal protein, since early humans simply did not have meat available at every meal. Sticking with reasonable portions two or three times a week will keep you in step with evolution.”

This statement is laughable on so many levels, it’s hard to know where to start. Grassfed beef most certainly is head and shoulders above feedlot beef. It comes from cattle that are healthy and living on pasture, where nature intended, and are not injected with hormones or administered antibiotics. If the farmer is conscientious about the health of the animals, environment, and people who consume the meat, they won’t use GM feed for their cattle either.

Nutrient levels in grass-fed meats are naturally higher as a result of good farming practices: fat-soluble vitamins A, D, & E, minerals like iron and zinc, Omega 3s, and CLA (conjugated linoleic acid). These nutrients “virtually vanish” in the feedlot environment from lack of exposure to sunshine, fresh air, grazing, and nutritive soil according to Eat Wild.

Feedlot meat’s unbalanced nutritional profile of Omega 6 EFAs

Feedlot meat is also higher in inflammatory Omega 6s, which people in developed countries such as the U.S. have in excess, and which causes chronic health issues and inflammation that contribute to Metabolic Syndrome, heart disease, obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes, and stroke.

Organic is not more nutritious

Dr. Oz persists in the idea that organic is no better nutritionally than conventional. These ideas have been refuted again, again and again by various studies. Even the Stanford study tried to say the same thing, and yet found nothing new. The results were just a compilation of previous studies, and it was revealed that the funding provided to Stanford for this effort came largely from big agricultural and biotech interests.

To say that buying organic food is no better for your health than conventional or is not worth the money spent is ignoring the long-term health effects of eating healthy on the risk of developing degenerative disease and illness. Eating healthy now will save you medical costs later. It’s that simple.

Remember, just because a bunch of mainstream sources who receive funding by big agriculture, health, and biotech entities tell the same lie over and over again, doesn’t make it true. Always follow the money.

GMOs, pesticides, antibiotics, hormones, and other toxins

Some of the most obvious benefits of eating organic food are that they are grown without antibiotics, hormones, herbicides, pesticides, GMOs, and other harmful chemicals. But Dr. Oz also doesn’t seem to be concerned about these issues with conventional foods nor that they are treated with chemicals, pesticides, hormones, antibiotics, and are genetically-modified. It’s especially ironic that he’s taken this stance when not so long ago, he allowed Jeffery Smith from the Institute for Responsible Technology to come on his show and talk about the dangers of GMOs right before the California Right To Know GMO labeling ballot initiative would be voted in.

He also allowed conventional scientists and other “experts” to come on the show, who demanded that Jeffery Smith leave the stage before coming on to talk about their viewpoint (which is pro-GMO). If Dr. Oz were a thinking person, he would have told those other scientists that it was his show and they should all be able to share the stage together (he’s had Jeffrey Smith as a guest in the past, with conventional scientists sitting there on the same stage refuting the information he provided).

Dr. Oz, who endorsed GM labeling and revealed that his wife worked on the Proposition 37 campaign to label GMOs, and has stated that to be safe, we should stick with organic foods:

In fact, he said that he prefers to be “cautious” at the end of a segment on his show filmed in October of this year (2012) titled GMO Foods: Are They Dangerous to Your Health? “Right now we have no way of knowing which foods have been genetically modified. I believe you should have that right,” he said. Wow, how much more inconsistent can you get, good Doctor? It’s clear that he’s trying to be all things to all people.

In light of all Dr. Oz’s conflicting statements that never seem to agree with one another, it’s pretty clear that he’s being paid off to say the things he does, and that depending on what day you turn his show on your television, you’ll get a different answer. He pretends to be holistic in his approach to health, but in the end, his advice ultimately serves the interests of the powerful and rich who aren’t concerned about the health, well-being or future of the world’s citizens. The things he says are not just false and irresponsible, but reckless. And the fact that he has such a massive following of people who hang on his every word for health advice makes him dangerous.

I think this should go without saying, but if you are in doubt…at best, be deeply suspicious of his ability to tell the truth – no matter how many of your friends and family are his faithful fans.